I think it’s pretty disingenuous to suggest that not allowing foreskin amputation nullifies all of Judaism. Many Jewish people whose parents decided not to circumcise them grow up to have fulfilling spiritual and cultural lives. No one does a dick check when you walk into synagogue.
There are many ways to maintain the symbolic importance of circumcision without resorting to unnecessary amputation, such as cutting a small mark in the foreskin to symbolize circumcision.
This really isn’t the forum for a religious discussion, but I have to say I’ve never understood this part. If you disengage Judaism from ethnicity to be purely a religion then, assuming freedom of religion, shouldn’t it be down to the child to make that decision at some point when society deems them capable of making a decision on their own (typically 16)?
In addition to what the others have said, it's less painful and easier to have done when younger. This is like saying parents shouldn't be allowed to make kids go to school, they should wait until they're old enough to make the decision themselves. Sometimes parents need to make a decision for their children, it's only logical.
It's not bullshit at all. Let's look at it a different way. If a child has some physical mutation such as webbed feet, an extra finger, or some other physical difference that they wouldn't affect their health, you're telling me a doctor shouldn't ask if a parent would like to have something done about it and instead the child should grow up with that until they are old enough to give consent? When is a proper age for consent?
I think it’s correct that unnecessary operations should only be done with the full consent of those participating... and even then I’d question the reasoning behind them. Just saying ah fuck it, we just chop bits of your penis off without asking you because a made up book says to, is equivalent to saying individuals have certain inalienable rights to decide for themselves what is done to their bodies is beyond insane.
